Инсталирайте Steam
вход
|
език
Опростен китайски (简体中文)
Традиционен китайски (繁體中文)
Японски (日本語)
Корейски (한국어)
Тайландски (ไทย)
Чешки (Čeština)
Датски (Dansk)
Немски (Deutsch)
Английски (English)
Испански — Испания (Español — España)
Испански — Латинска Америка (Español — Latinoamérica)
Гръцки (Ελληνικά)
Френски (Français)
Италиански (Italiano)
Индонезийски (Bahasa Indonesia)
Унгарски (Magyar)
Холандски (Nederlands)
Норвежки (Norsk)
Полски (Polski)
Португалски (Português)
Бразилски португалски (Português — Brasil)
Румънски (Română)
Руски (Русский)
Финландски (Suomi)
Шведски (Svenska)
Турски (Türkçe)
Виетнамски (Tiếng Việt)
Украински (Українська)
Докладване на проблем с превода
Правила и насоки за дискусии
Докладване на публикацията
The 3ds didn't have any competition either, it still didn't sell well. Nintendo has always dominated the handheld console market. Not having much competition doesn't mean your product is gonna sell well if its not priced at a good point.
3ds launch date - March 27, 2011
Via launch date - December 17, 2011
So yes, as stated it launched with no competition. The vita coming out 9 months later isn't competition at launch, unlike the Steam Deck which had actual competition out before it and AFTER it.
Steam Deck release date - February 25, 2022
GPD Win 3 - Jan 2021
OneXPlayer - Dec 2021
GPD Win MAX - June 2020
Aya Neo Founder - July 2021
Aya Neo - Dec 2022
Those are just SOME of the alternatives to the steam deck, so the steam deck launched to quite a bit more competition then the 3ds did, AND without the complete dominating history that Nintendo has with the hand held market.
3ds launched with poor sales and lackluster reception. Nintendo directly commented and acknowledged the poor sales. It had nothing to do with the Vita. They severely over-priced the 3ds as people were not expecting such a high priced system from Nintendo, and once they lowered the price to a more reasonable level it did great.
DS and PSP where already competing with each other at this point. 3DS launched first but did its price drop in October not March right before the launch of the Vita.
The devices you listed weren't really competitors. It wasn't until March of this year when AMD launched the Ryzen Z1 and Z1 Extreme chips that things got competitive as the Steam Deck had a custom SOC and previous devices had more or less just taken parts available for other devices and put them in a gaming device. It was night and day different before compared to after.
The devices he listed were all handheld form-factor PCs. They were direct competitors to the Deck.
IIRC Valve even talked about the current market lacking a cheaper choice and that's why they made the Deck.
Not really, all of those are direct competitors
In fact multiple sites even note that - https://www.pcmag.com/picks/cant-buy-a-steam-deck-alternatives-to-consider
https://droix.net/blogs/the-best-steam-deck-alternatives/
There were a massive amount of competitors, but Steam priced theirs competitively which is what the 3ds failed to do.
Do you all get kick backs from Valve? Why people show such loyalty to companies that typically don't do anything unless it profits them. Yet you work for them for free to try and go on some sort to self fulfilled justice rants.
I mean Valve takes 30 percent revenue just to put the game on their platform. Only 3 percent of developers in surveys think that is fair. It is also the reason we are seeing price increases.
All I was suggesting is Valve show some semblance of loyalty and do something cool for early adopters. But seeing as how it is so easy for you all and it isn't a big deal and it is so easy for you all to just drop this type of money on a device all the time then I was wait for you generous gift to my Steam Account so I can purchase an OLED model because after all it shouldn't be a big deal am I right?
For example, all I was going to write was "If they wanted to do this, they probably already would've done so".
How many Developers, out of the entire Developer pool was actually given such a survey? Because often surveys are done with very few people that could possibly represent the whole, and usually done in areas to get more of what one wants to have as a narrative, rather than reach out for more of a sample size in truthful environments.
For example, I see plenty of 100 person surveys, for things that are supposedly used to represent an entire country, usually done in an area that would give the survey giver the results they personally want. Without polling as many as possibly, it's not probable that only 3% agree with the cut being fair.
Early adoption doesn't really mean one is deserved something though. They can do so if they want, but buying the 1st thing doesn't mean you'll get "more" when something else comes out. Patience is often better if one wants more, wants a bundle, a promotional bundle/sale etc.
Again, if they want to, they likely would've done so. But consumers are not entitled to anything simply for buying the 1st thing. Would it be nice for such? Sure, but they also only own their own games, they are free to give their own games with the Deck, but to get others likely they'd have to ask or pay the Dev for it, and it's always best to ask for permission than forgiveness when it comes to B2B things if wanting to do promotional stuff.
First of all what does them not being available NOW, have anything to do with the fact that they were available before and after the launch of the Steam deck and were competition?
Secondly they are indeed still available now, you can find them on amazon. It's not a matter of loyalty, you were making erroneous claims and I posted the actual correct info. The Nintendo ambassador program was one of Nintendo's biggest mistakes and something they had to quickly take action to correct.
The steam deck was the exact opposite and aggressively priced from the get go. Trying to compare the two is nonsensical.
Not to mention most people will say they feel the prices of what they pay for a variety of things are too high, yet have you wondered why those dev's who feel the price is too high aren't putting their games on Humble or EPIC? They might complain about the price, but they know they won't sell a fraction of what they will on Steam. It's also the same cut many other stores take as well, so its not even that unusual of a cut. Epic charges less, but EPIC also has a trainwreck of a store that has lost over a billion dollars to date and has major issues...
Also your claims about Valve's cut being the reason you are seeing price increases for games is also wrong. Your seeing the same increases on other stores like EPIC, Battle.net, etc. The increase is because adjusted for inflation games haven't had a price increase in 20+ years and are at record low levels.
Again, basic research is very important before making claims.
That's still competition on release. Them being available now is irrelevant to if they were competition or not because they were in the market on the release of the Deck.
There is no "self fulfilled justice rants", just explanations on how the situations aren't comparable.
Valve's 30% isn't a hard number and is actually only 25% IIRC. It's also the standard for any type of store to cover overhead, even brick and mortar where you actually have to complete with physical space. When publishing a game on Steam, you get a DRM(albeit, a very light one) if you want, forums(with mods), mod support, multiplayer support, streamlined updating, achuevment support and even extra goodies in the form of the points shop. That's where that percentage cut goes.
I have no need for an OLED model because I'm fine with an OG model that I bought at release. The tweaks to the OLED aren't worth the money to me and that's fine.
Was I annoyed they released an OLED model? Yeah, a tad. But I've done the tech game long enough to know how hardware iterations are and knew being an early adopter means I would miss out on a newer iteration if one came.
I don't like Epic game store and haven't spent a dime on it. Yet I some ways it is awesome because even though I haven't put a dime into it I now own over 420 games on the platform. Given to me for free. New games every single week. Not just crap games, some are indeed, but good games even if some are older. Borderlands 2,3 and pre-sequel, Bioshock Remastered collection, Batman Arkham Collection, Axiom Verge, Allen Wake, A Plague Tale: Innocence, Celeste, City Skylines, Control, Darksiders 1&2 remasters, Death Stranding, Dishonored, Fallout 1,2,3, Tactics, and New Vegas, Ghost Wire Tokyo, GTA 5, Homeworld Remastered Collection, Metro Redux Collection, Nioh Complete Edition, Prey, Ultimate Editions of 3 newest Tomb Raider games, Civilization VI, Sonic Mania, The Messenger, The Outer Worlds, Total War Warhammer 1&2, Transistor, Tyrrany, Watch Dogs 1 & 2, Wolfenstein New Order, Wonderboy, Xcom 2 etc etc etc. To just name a few that grabbed my attention with a quick scroll through. This from a company that hasn't received 1 cent from me.
Ok So now as someone that bought a Steam Controller, a Steam Machine, a Steam Link, and a Steam Deck and has a ton more games on my Steam account all of which have been paid for and Valve has done what?
I don't think some customer loyalty and doing something cool for the customer every once in a while is such a far fetched idea.
-Epic takes all of their income, and push it into the money pit that is EGS
-Epic is trying to lure new users and a large amount of them into being paying customers, by offering free games for years, which is still a failing strategy, resulting in returning to the first point.
It has nothing to do with the cut, realistically. It's a failure of an experiment with money being shoveled into it, thus it's not even a true competitor compared to Ubi/EA/etc.
You get almost nothing compared to using Steam, so "that is their whole thing" is a much more limited customer base, far less overall reach, an anti-competitive nature, and a lot less extras that Valve handles via Steam. Lots of people don't like EGS Exclusives compared to letting them sell anywhere & everywhere (which even means not just steam). Valve lets you sell anywhere you want to sell your game, not just on Steam, as long as you don't mis-use or abuse the Steam Keys system outside of Steam.
Loads of people just claim the free game & don't spend on there especially outside of fortnite transactions, so it's displaying of not being a serious competitor as a store/service.
It's easy to take less of a cut, and spend money on trying to entice people to become customers, not realizing that a failing strategy is still that.
Notice how all of that free stuff isn't from being a loyal customer?
Given you an unlimited status, ability to upload an absurd amount of screenshots, use all the social features, access to any steam related services you're allowed access to, including SteamCMD to get & run dedicated servers (for things you're allowed such), any and all other tools added via steam, the workshop which does all of the work for you rather than manual installations and manual updating, community market & trading system (allows more account steam wallet generation if done well), ETC.
Let's not forget Steam Sales are a huge selling point as well, known internationally, so affordability with patience is a huge advantage to using Steam.
They can do that, if they want to.
If they do, they do.
If they don't, they don't.
That's up to them.
But people are not entitled to such merely for making purchases.